Various Reformed denominations, including the Christian Reformed Church (CRC), joined with the Roman Catholic Church on Tuesday night to sign a historic, mutually agreed upon statement of belief about baptism.
The agreement on baptism represents a significant breakthrough in ecumenical relations since until now the Catholic Church has not always recognized baptisms that took place in Reformed denominations in part because of issues related to how the Trinity was referenced in the baptismal ceremony, according to a story in the Austin-American Statesman.
The result of many years of careful, steady work on the part of the CRC and the other groups, the agreement cleared up the issue involving the Trinity.
Replete with liturgy and a sprinkling of water as a sign of baptism, the ceremony at Saint Mary’s Catholic Cathedral in downtown Austin, Texas was part of the opening of the annual meeting of the interdenominational group Christian Churches Together — a strong backer of what is called the Common Agreement on Mutual Recognition of Baptism
Although the CRC Synod accepted and passed the document in 2011, it took until now for the formal ceremony involving all parties to take place.
Rev. Joel Boot, executive director of the Christian Reformed Church, signed the agreement on behalf of the CRC. He also offered a few remarks on the significance of the agreement.
In remarks he gave on Tuesday night, he said, “Together we affirm, as a sign of our unity and as a witness to ecumenical commitment, the practice of inviting the presence and, where appropriate, the participation of members of our respective communions in the celebration of Baptism.
“At the same time, we affirm our responsibility to respect the integrity of the distinct baptismal practices of the communions in which the rite of Baptism is administered . . .”
Before he left for Texas, he said, “I'm grateful that the CRC can be part of what is yet another move toward Christian unity,” he said before leaving for Texas.
“I am especially grateful for those in our denomination and in the other denominations who have come together and worked for so long on this joint statement on such a central element of our faith.”
Five CRC five representatives were involved in the interfaith discussions as part what was called the Reformed-Catholic Dialogue.
After the signing, Boot — and each of the heads of the Reformed denominations involved in the dialogue — offered prayers of intercession.
Besides the CRC representatives, the dialogue brought together theologians from the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Reformed Church in America, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) and the United Church of Christ to discuss ways in which beliefs on baptism converge.
After the signing ceremony, participants took part in a candlelight procession from the cathedral to nearby Central Presbyterian Church where there was a reception and a brief program.
During the reception, the heads of the Reformed denominations had a chance to briefly say a few words about the significance of this agreement for their respective denominations.
The Common Agreement on the Mutual Recognition of Baptism recognizes that a person baptized in the Catholic Church need not be baptized again if he or she joins a CRC congregation. In many ways, synod’s decision formalizes a practice and view that has been held in the CRC for many years.
The document states: “Together, we affirm, as a sign of our unity and as a witness to ecumenical commitment, the practice of inviting the presence and, where appropriate, the participation of members of our respective communions in the celebration of Baptism.”
Comments
Thank you for including the concerns raised by Synod 2011. Even though we passed the document, it was not unanimous and was not without reservation. One brother who is minister to many immigrants from Mexico raised a strong point that led me to reconsider my own vote. He basically said the Catholic Church in Mexico is very different than that in the USA and is seen as an entirely different religion. Others in/from Mexico have said the degree that pagan beliefs and practices have co-mingled with Catholicism at the very least create a strong impression that Catholicism is not properly "Christian," and that rebaptism is as necessary as if coming with a Mormon or Jehovah's Witness baptism. This delegate was perhaps in mind when you wrote "Delegates also expressed concern over what will happen if a former Catholic wants to become a CRC member and asks to be re-baptized to celebrate and reflect the decision to change religious traditions." I thought the concern raised by this brother was an important one to consider and am glad your report included mention of the reservations raised by Synod 2011. Thanks!
I am thankful for the progress made at Synod and now this event. In over 40 years of ministry in Latin American settings I have worked through many angles of this. A point to note is "contextualization" as regards, for instance, Mexican Catholicism. This is about mission in the USA (with broader implications, of course) and it is the pastoral duty to educate people about all that is involved in this profound yet highly spiritual and symbolic sacrament. If we ever want to have truly "reformed" Hispanic congregations, this is foundational; otherwise we'll just be "generic evangelicals." Bendiciones!
Actually, Rev. Boot already signed the Common Agreement on the Mutual Recognition of Baptism, on September 29, 2011, following its approval by Synod 2011. My understanding is that this occasion is to celebrate the agreement between the PCUSA (signed June 11, 2009), the USCCB (signed November 16, 2010), the RCA (signed September 19, 2011), the UCC (signed September 19, 2011), and the CRCNA.
Catholicism is our mission field, not our equal. The Catholic doctrine on Baptism and the Lord's Supper is not biblically expedient, and is apostate. We must remain separate for the sake of the gospel. The goal of the Catholic church is to promote ecumenicalism, to ultimately bring protestants back under the papacy, and into a one world economic and religious system. It looks like they are succeeding. I am sorry, for the sake of the gospel that this took place.
I hate to criticize a fellow writer, but this is a badly written story (and the editing isn't any better). It leaves important and relevant questions unanswered. And it also uses the word "inter-faith" when it means "inter-denominational." Unless the author means to suggest -- as at least one commenter here does -- that Roman Catholics belong to a different, non-Christian "faith." (Faith used in that sense equals "religion." Inter-faith means interaction/discussion between members of two or more different religions, e.g., Christian and Muslim, NOT between different Christian churches.)
Regarding the unanswered questions: What WAS the issue regarding the Trinity that seemed a sticking point in earlier days and has now been resolved? I'm trying to imagine, since Catholics and all the other churches involved baptize children in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. A far bigger sticking point, it seems to me, is the fact that the Roman Catholic Church believes that baptism is regenerative in a way that Reformed churches do not; and that baptism is necessary for salvation -- thus the added horrible grief of Catholic parents who have infants who die, and die unbaptized.
I'm all for agreeing with other denominations where we can, including, and perhaps even especially, with the Catholic Church. (We certainly must be their allies on social issues like abortion, gay marriage, etc. But those are not theological issues, first of all.) In my view there is, however, too much seeking after warm-fuzzy feelings on the part of CRC leaders with leaders of other churches with whom we may or may not share theology and a biblical worldview. The fact that the United Church of Christ was part of that agreement, or any agreement the CRC makes, is astonishing to me. The UCC -- the odd congregation excepted -- can hardly be called Reformed any more. In fact, it can't even be called Christian. The CRC's joining, a while back, the World Alliance of Reformed Churches -- hardly a theologically orthodox group -- is also classic example of that.
I would be nice if somebody in the CRC leadership were to answer these questions.
Baptism is an external sign of an internal condition (faith in Christ Jesus). From the Reformed point of view, it is the gateway to the Covenants (which replaces the Old Testament circumcision); however the Catholic Church considers baptism in a different way, because it is done for salvation. The administration of this sacrament in the Catholic Church has a strong theological impact on who receives it, because from there the person is considered saved for having this sacrament and he then supplements it with good works. But theologically speaking, the denomination contradicts itself by accepting something that is not according to our theology, regardless of who administer it or not.
Our Hispanic churches are filled everyday with people who leave Catholicism to get closer to the reality of a relationship with Jesus Christ which fills them and transforms their lives. But it is in reality the greatest changes, that of leaving behind traditions of men and erroneous teachings and become participants of a new walk which represents that of knowing the word of God and living according to his teachings. That is precisely the great contribution that the Reformed achieved in the life of human beings who have been able to understand the times of God and his moving through these men whom He used to open the eyes of those that were blind to understand divine revelation.
Therefore, as a Hispanic pastor, would I not be failing my conscience if I were to tell you that it is okay to accept what corresponds to the faith they professed?
If, to many of them, Catholicism represents the great whore of Babylon, would I be able to calmly tell them the sacrament which that institution carried out on them is okay?
Unfortunately our beloved denomination did not take into account our humble concept, but rather that of the Catholic Church and its practices and rites, and they are far from being accepted by those who sit in the pews of our churches every Sunday to be instructed according to the truth of God's Word.
I am not Donatist or Anabaptist. I am simply a Reformed pastor who views with concern the stagnation of our denomination, unable to open its eyes to our reality.
Let’s choose whom we will serve: the gods which our fathers served that were on the other side of the River (traditions, rites, sacraments for salvation, papal infallibility, etc., etc., etc.) As for me and my house, we will serve Jehovah.